Discuss the contention that the House of Lords is irrelevant.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

﻿Joshua Watson. Discuss the contention that the house of lords is irrelevant. The House of Lords was, until the early 20th century the senior of the two houses in the British political system. Its members enjoyed greater powers than the members of the House of Commons, but as the 1911 and 1949 acts were introduced the powers of the Lords were greatly reduced. The abilities of the upper house became an issue as society became more democratic and concerned about the unrepresentative nature of the House; after all it was at one point hereditary peers only. It is now argued the House of Lords have become irrelevant because of its great reduction in powers and abilities to hold the lower house to account; it's still unrepresentative nature and lack of legitimacy. Beginning at the start of the reforms, under the Liberal government Lloyd George purpose the introduction of a land tax which would affect rich wealthy land owners. This bill was challenged by the conservatives, as many of them where wealthy land owners and wanted to raise import taxes instead. The bill went ahead and passed through the House of Commons, however when the Bill reached the upper house it was struck down by the Conservative lords. The Prime Minister Henry Asquith requested the king make sufficient Liberal Lords to pass the bill if the conservative lords reject it again. ...read more.

Middle

voting system. A good illustration of this role was when the Thatcher government enjoyed majorities of over 100 following the elections of 1983. This meant the House of Lords were improving parliamentary opposition, effectively holding government to account and making up for the opposition?s weakness. This scrutiny of the executive is made clear through the huge amount of time (around 80%) the Lords spend scrutinising and revising legislation. Their regular attendance and increasing numbers means the House is adopting this role very seriously ensuring their relevancy in the British political system. Arguably the House of Lords have become even more effective at performing this role after The House of Lords Act in 1998 because party leaderships have been selecting more professional politicians to become Lords, who are, arguably, better at scrutinising the executive. As we have seen before, the House of Lords is heavily involved in the Legislative process and although they can no longer stop bills that can (and commonly do) make amendments. A recent example of this was on the 3rd of November 2011, when the House of Lords made 6 amendments to the Armed Forces Bill. This is an important function of the House because it oversees the work of the executive and ensures the elected Government is remaining representative, ensuing accountability. Some criticize this oversight of the executive as irrelevant because the house is not elected, and is a very unrepresentative elitist group. ...read more.

Conclusion

This clearly shows that many political elites see the House as irrelevant in its current state, and would be become more relevant, up to date and perhaps even more effective if these reforms were to go ahead. The Electoral Reform Society see it as 'removing the burden from parliament'. The House of Lords is seen by some as a irrelevant institute that is out of touch with modern society. However I think the second chamber is crucial as it acts as a political safeguard that effectively holds the government to account in the event of poor opposition in the House of Commons. Although the House faces criticism for its undemocratic nature, it is this that allows it to remain a relevant part of society that does no unnecessarily damage the House of Commons. If the House were to be elected by a proportional representation system, such as STV suggested by the Electoral Reform Society, it would become a danger as it would be more representative of the people than the commons and could cause for a demand of power off the lower House. Overall I do not think the House of Lords is irrelevant in modern politics as it performs many important roles effectively, and although at first glance it seems out of place in a democratic society, it would be an executive dictatorship without it. ...read more.

Related AS and A Level United Kingdom essays

Lastly, there have been recent reforms that have strengthened the legislative process. For example; since 2006, the committees scrutinising Bills have been given the additional power of taking evidence from experts. Also, the new backbench Business Committee has taken away some of the governments control over the parliamentary timetable.

Voters also tend to feel a natural link with the whole of Leeds, for example, rather than an allegiance to Leeds North or Leeds Central. They may prefer to have real influence with the MPs representing the whole of the city, rather than hold one MP responsible for their sector.

Consider the advantages and disadvantages of this process of law making. (B) There are many advantages of the legislative process, these include; 100 law are passed a year, this means that every year Parliament can pass about 100 new laws.

'change hands' from one election to another, which adds to the wasted votes, as this is so consistent. Also due to this consistency, parties can decide who's going to sit in Parliament for that constituency and can choose MPs who are more loyal to the party, without worrying too much about public image.

Just because their father was a lord, it does not necessarily make the inherited lords any good at doing the job. Also, the life peers may have been very old and thus could mean that many of the life peers could not attend the House.

the Royal Commission, for the Reform of the House of Lords and also the leader of the opposition the Right Honourable Ian Duncan Smith's proposals. The option of a directly elected second chamber to secure a 'more democratic and more representative' House of Lords does cause us to question what method of electoral representation is to be used.

It could be argued that what the Lords weren't necessarily looking after their own self-interests but in fact the interests of the Conservative Party and its leader Balfour. The Lords were classed as 'Balfour's Poodle' as opposed to being the Watchdog of the Constitution.

As a result, chances are high that people will simply vote for ?another politician? than for somebody who does not belong to any party at all but who might have been the right candidate. This is strengthened by the fact that politicians usually possess the ability to sell themselves in public, whereas others may seem intimidated in comparison.